Risk Assesement: Acturial or Clinical?

Pros actuarial: is a structured risk assessment to predict probable violent behavior and other risk behaviors. Forensic evaluator communicates with the tester himself and what factors were based on, and the empirical data supporting them. Any employee can use a risk assessment tool because it is structured and already scored based on the responses.  Some risk assessments such as the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, have been used for years to predict psychopathy. According to Hanson, R. K., (2005), “ Robert Hare’s dogged efforts to establish psychopathy as a reliable and valid clinical construct produced the first big success in violence risk prediction” (p. 213).

Cons: Violent risk predictors are not always exact. According to Hanson, R. K., (2005), “ The available research suggests that potentially changeable factors ( e.g., attitudes, lifestyle instability) contribute information to risk potential that is not captured by purely static, historical factors” (p. 214).

Pros clinical: clinical assessments are the base for actuarial assessment. The forensic evaluator is interested in the possibility of violent behavior within the next few days and weeks.  The clinical interview conducted by a professional is very detailed assessment which consists in gathering information about the patient’s past, family history, and lifestyle.  For instance, children with parents suffering from major depression are most likely to exhibit depression at some point.  This information about the patient could prevent further undesirable behavior.  According to  Zeepedia.com  (n.d)“The role of the clinician is crucial for certain types of tasks that cannot be conducted adequately by purely empirical methods, including the generation of hypotheses and the use of theory in formulating questions” (p. 122).

Cons: Unfortunately, extended research has proven clinical assessment cannot predict violent behavior. This could be to the fact that the forensic evaluator can diagnose the patient,  at his or her own discretion. In addition, clinical assessments measure psychological  issues such as depression,  and personality disorders.  

Conclusion:  I believe both risk assessments complement each other. It is necessary to  obtain information from clinical assessment to come up with statistical research. According to E. Drogin, F. Dattilio, R. Sadoff, T. Gutheil ( 2011), “As in the assessment of suicide risk, the evaluator focuses on the clinical aspects of the evaluation-namely, psychopathology- but also must take it into consideration demographic, historical, and environmental factors that may be related to an increased risk for violence or suicide” (p. 336).  

Zeepedia.com (n.d). The concept of Psychological Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.zeepedia.com/read.php?the_concept_of_psychological_assessment_in_clinical_psychology_clinical_psychology&b=84&c=15